beatport downloads. wavs vs. vinyl

blancodisco · Post by **blancodisco** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:09 am

My feeling on the topic... although I think it's great that Beatport offers wavs as downloadables now, it's getting almost to the pricepoint of full 12" prices. As an avid collector, I might as well pay the extra dollar or two and actually own the vinyl and packaging/artwork to throw onto the shelf at the of the day. I suppose one could argue, it's worth the extra dollar to have these sites offer the wav files as it is a mad time saver... and that's certainly worth something. However,
it's certainly a bit more impressive/glamorous to see the vinyl on the shelf than an increasing number of dvd books full of archived vinyl rips and digital downloads for backup. Aside from the fact that vinyl is a much better visual historical document to archive and map of one's musical journey in life. The vinyl and its package bring personality to the table. a silver disc with how many other gigabytes of trax although shiny... just doesn't have the same sparkle if placed side by side if you catch my drift. Call me materialistic I guess. For me, the extra effort put forth to get those vinyl digitized and backedup and tagged myself, is still worth it to own the actual vinyl release.

Vinyl = work of art.
Discs = practical. functional.

Ironicaly, the point where I'm at now...
I prefer to perform with digital files now more than traditional vinyl luggin, solely for the access to a greater library that I could never possibly carry to a gig. My music collection and music making gear will hopefully always be that hybird of analog and digital merged together in some symbiotic way.

smutek · Post by **smutek** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:42 am

Great points. I am personally not willing to pay the extra cost for a wav file. I use traktor for Djing so 320 kbps mp3's suit me fine.

Like you said, when the cost of digital media begins to approach that of vinyl I would rather pay the extra couple of dollars to own the vinyl. I love vinyl and often times miss buying it, been buying mostly mp3's/cd's and very little vinyl these last two years. My poor tecniques have been seeing very little action.

But again, like you, I choose mp3's because they are cheaper and instead of a record bag I can bring my laptop with my entire music colllection.

So yes, I totally agree with you.

DISUYE · Post by **DISUYE** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:50 am

To be honest folks - this $1 WAV charge is probably just a temporary fee to offset the cost of increased bandwidth etc.

Given time, full resolution digital sales will replace compressed formats on places like Beatport; simply as storage & bandwidth costs becomes less of an issue.

MP3's (in my own mind at least) are a temporary stop-gap required to bridge current technological issues surrounding content delivery. I only buy them now, in support of companies who intend to offer WAVs in the future.

Bring on the full quality 16 bit online sales and I'll be as happy as a pig in shit :)

Dan

djsynchro · Post by **djsynchro** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:47 am

The dollar is too much it should have been 50 cents but people are greedy. Write them about it.

john gordon · Post by **john gordon** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 2:15 pm

its still only 2.49.how do you see that this is anywhere close to what vinyl costs?

blancodisco · Post by **blancodisco** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:54 pm

john gordon wrote:its still only 2.49.how do you see that this is anywhere close to what vinyl costs?

When you buy a full release. say , 12" single with three to four mixes on it for instance, the price of the wavs if buying the full release is almost as much as the real physical vinyl product, plus you acquire the artwork/packaging/sleeve. The physical world release as opposed at sort of virtual one, wav/mp3 (not even cover art embedded into the wav like an mp3 as from say the itunes store). If yer a collector owning the vinyl will always be worth more than any digital download. I'd say yer are getting much much less from the digital download for your money. For me, I feel like you get more when buying the vinyl release.

dCross · Post by **dCross** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:02 pm

blancodisco wrote:
john gordon wrote:its still only 2.49.how do you see that this is anywhere close to what vinyl costs?
When you buy a full release. say , 12" single with three to four mixes on it for instance, the price of the wavs if buying the full release is almost as much as the real physical vinyl product, plus you acquire the artwork/packaging/sleeve. The physical world release as opposed at sort of virtual one, wav/mp3 (not even cover art embedded into the wav like an mp3 as from say the itunes store). If yer a collector owning the vinyl will always be worth more than any digital download. I'd say yer are getting much much less from the digital download for your money. For me, I feel like you get more when buying the vinyl release.

True, but 90% of the time, I only like 1 song on a single that contains four songs. For me, it's an incredible deal as I don't have to pay for music I don't want.

dirtystudios · Post by **dirtystudios** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:16 pm

I actually enjoy ripping vinyl. Not the actual process, which is a pain in the ass, but the sound of the track as oppossed to something that's been in the digital realm it's whole life. There's something about the slight distortion and artifacts generated by records that make the music seeem more real. Plus, it is cool to have the actual platters for posterity's sake.

I'd just get the vinyl and record it myself.

k

inis · Post by **inis** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:26 pm

I dont think it is anywhere close to the cost of viny. Most people will never use both sides of a vinyl. they will buy it because they only want one remix. So, essentially you are still paying $10 for one song. AND, they dont have any longevity. They are big, fragile, and everntually will not be good anymore. The WAVS are your forever. If you record the vinyl into the computer, then its even a bigger waste, because you have no use for it. $3.50 is the most you will ever pay for one wav song on beatport. Thats alot different than $10+tax. I really dont think there is any comparison.

blancodisco · Post by **blancodisco** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 7:46 pm

inis wrote:I dont think it is anywhere close to the cost of viny. Most people will never use both sides of a vinyl. they will buy it because they only want one remix. So, essentially you are still paying $10 for one song. AND, they dont have any longevity. They are big, fragile, and everntually will not be good anymore. The WAVS are your forever. If you record the vinyl into the computer, then its even a bigger waste, because you have no use for it. $3.50 is the most you will ever pay for one wav song on beatport. Thats alot different than $10+tax. I really dont think there is any comparison.

And then when there are those vinyl releases that do have the hits or fantastic b-side cuts, a limited production run, my vinyl version on my wall will forever fetch for some nice coinage, be worth something to someone out there, never the .wav file backed up cdr/dvdr.

Vinyl will forever be a worthwhile investment.
A downloadable .wav file is only a file of 1's and 0's.
As powerful as it is... is still worthless in the physical world.

Buying strictly .wav/digital files in a lot of ways... is sorta pissing money
down the toilet. At least with Vinyl, there's something physical. an actual
product to represent it. contain the music within.

subterFUSE · Post by **subterFUSE** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:45 pm

Towards the end, when I was still buying records, it was costing me closer to $15 per vinyl.

I don't see how you guys are coming up with this "WAV is almost as much as Vinyl" argument.

marky · Post by **marky** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:54 pm

Lots of good points here.

I was buying a ton of new tracks today and I thought, maybe I'll just go for the wav download, then thought "fuck it" .. the MP4 versions are not too shabby and an extra 20 bucks for 20 tracks would get you another 10 tracks on top of it.

But I'd probably consider the .wavs more if I was Djing with the tracks, mine are only for my own consumption.

Hopefully MP3s will fade into the darkness in the not too distant future but I wouldn't hold my breath.

supster · Post by **supster** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:25 pm

dirtystudios wrote: There's something about the slight distortion and artifacts generated by records that make the music seeem more real.

tiny bit of saturator + that vinyl noise plug. lol ... no really, try it

it really all depends on whether you want to pay the extra $10-12 for the artwork and a little bit of mystique and bragging rights.

i swear thats basically it
.

Deft · Post by **Deft** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:33 pm

I'm not a big fan of vinyl, not sure about downloading .wavs.
I'd like to see most tracks getting a proper cd release - simply for the properly stamped disc, case and artwork. Much easier to visualise and flick through your collection IMO.

inis · Post by **inis** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:03 pm

supster wrote:
dirtystudios wrote: There's something about the slight distortion and artifacts generated by records that make the music seeem more real.

tiny bit of saturator + that vinyl noise plug. lol ... no really, try it

it really all depends on whether you want to pay the extra $10-12 for the artwork and a little bit of mystique and bragging rights.

i swear thats basically it
.

Exactly. ANd for everyont that thinks their vinyl is going to be worth money the older it gets, keep dreaming. 99.9% of shit that is released will never be worth more than you paid for it. 99.9% of the time, you will most likely only get a couple bucks if you ever sell it.

Electronic music is the worst. TO actually sell a vintage piece would totally depend on finding an obsessed collector. This isnt the Beatles or anything like that.

All you have on the wall is a trohpy showing how much money you paid.